The EU’s Indo-Pacific strategy comes better late than never. But it has to step gingerly. It cannot antagonize China, wants to build on the legacy of its members’ colonial past, give the region the infrastructure it needs, and make the trade agreements that it wants. Is it achievable?
- Central Asia
- East Asia
- South Asia
- South East Asia
- West Asia
- Global Commons
- Book Reviews
- Conference Reports
- GH in the Media
- GH Wiki
- Maps and Infographics
- Partner Publication
- Podcasts and Videos
- Research Papers
- Research Reports
Now that the India-U.S. 2+2 meeting has ended, Indian officials are preparing for a hectic season of summiteering in November, from the SCO to the BRICS and the G20. All will give India global attention, and help the country prepare its positioning at home and abroad.
The UN turned 75 this year but instead of grand celebrations, the world witnessed an empty UNGA with world leaders addressing it via video screening because of the pandemic. The UN is under unprecedented stress and being shown up for its inability to tackle the challenges of today like the pandemics, climate change, terrorism or global peace and security. The institution's key governing structures, especially the UN Security Council, are inadequate and demand reform. India must now use gritty resolve to ensure its place in these governing structures.
Ambassador Rajiv Bhatia, Distinguished Fellow, Foreign Policy Studies Programme, Gateway House delivered the opening remarks at the 2020 Asia Economic and Entrepreneurship Summit, in the lead-up to the session, - The Future of Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation in a Sustainable VUCA World – What to Expect? What Next? The Summit was jointly organised by the KSI Strategic Institute for Asia Pacific (KSI), The Pacific Basin Economic Council (PBEC) and China Daily Asia Pacific (CD), Kuala Lumpur, 8 September 2020.
Manjeet Kriplani, Executive Director, Gateway House, in discussion with Prof. Rory Medcalf, Head, National Security College, Australian National University, and author of Indo-Pacific Empire: China, America and the Contest for the World's Pivotal Region; and Cleo Paskal, Associate Fellow, Energy, Environment and Resources, and Asia-Pacific, Chatham House; on the possibility of an Indo-Pacific Charter for the region.
Manjeet Kripalani, Executive Director, Gateway House, in discussion with Prof. Rory Medcalf, Head, National Security College, Australian National University, and author of Indo-Pacific Empire: China, America and the Contest for the World's Pivotal Region; and Cleo Paskal, Associate Fellow, Energy, Environment and Resources, and Asia-Pacific, Chatham House; on the possibility of an Indo-Pacific Charter for the region.
The Trans-Pacific Partnership has dropped strong Intellectual Property Rights regulations on India’s doorstep. The implications of these regulations could affect India’s own policies, as well as her global aspirations towards the potential Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership.
The U.S.-driven Trans Pacific Partnership agreement between 12 countries, which is aiming to become the new standard of world trade, impacts domestic systems globally. For India, it will skew investment and intellectual property rights, and especially the debate over the Investor State Dispute System which allows companies to challenge sovereign rights and public policy.
Although it is too soon to comprehensively analyse the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement of October 5, it is worth assessing what is known. Here are the facts, the controversies, the assessments, and the implications for countries that are not part of the agreement, especially India.
The Trans-Pacific Partnership might soon be concluded if the U.S. Congress fast-tracks it, as recently announced, while the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement remains on slow-track. But the TPP, although ambitious, follows an outdated template, and it is the dynamic RCEP that can be a model for a new global rules-based framework